GM sharing your driver info and driving up insurance rates..

[Blansky]

An interesting article of GM collecting date illegally (?), selling it and it allowing insurance companies to raise insurance rates, sometimes even if you aren't the driver of the car.

When on the ABC link look for the NY Times article link actually who broke the story.

https://abc7ny.com/driver-data-onsta...nies/14516634/

https://www.businessinsider.com/cars...rt-2024-3?op=1

[Maleg]

Imagine what Siri and Alexa are reporting, and to whom.

[gingerbee]

Ya this is crazy GM says you can opt out of it, but really should this be the default I think you should have to opt in not out.

[Carguy87]

Ugh we all know this kind of thing is happening left and right, but I always get a little depressed when I think about how shockingly little privacy anyone has left in this age of technology.

It’s like that line from Jurassic Park by Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum)

“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.”

[Krash]

Originally Posted by gingerbee

Ya this is crazy GM says you can opt out of it, but really should this be the default I think you should have to opt in not out.

Yes. Did people know to begin with? If not, how would they know to opt out?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by Krash

Yes. Did people know to begin with? If not, how would they know to opt out?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am sure there is some reference to how customer data is managed (sold) buried in the pages of fine print associated with the OnStar service. It doesn’t look like GM considers data privacy a customer concern that they should address at purchase though.

[2000-NJDEVILS]

No need to panic!
In the fine print - There is an “Opt Out” provision on collecting data to be shared for the OnStar service….

[77T]

When a carmaker sells one's data - which, in turn, costs one higher rates for insurance - it could end up in court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[330ci]

Originally Posted by 77T

When a carmaker sells one's data - which, in turn, costs one higher rates for insurance - it could end up in court.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

For once, I'm in favor of the ambulance chasers.


Yet another reason why I prefer old shit boxes.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Imagine what Siri and Alexa are reporting, and to whom.

You have to wonder.

[chro.nic]

Originally Posted by Maleg

Imagine what Siri and Alexa are reporting, and to whom.

Ask them!

.nic

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by 2000-NJDEVILS

No need to panic!
In the fine print - There is an “Opt Out” provision on collecting data to be shared for the OnStar service….

Not much of a consolation when a incentivized dealer signed you up without your knowledge, and your insurance has now gone up.

In another article there was a case of a wife’s insurance going up because the car was in her husbands name at the dealership and they used his data.

[enjoythemusic]

Am sure you all realize Google, Facebook, Apple, Financial interests, etc gather data and 'feed' you want they choose. The recent TicToc debacle proves who wants control. They all have power to manipulate, sway sentiment, etc. No big deal, we all know that's just how it is.

[zengineer]

If you are connected to a website through the internet and are not a customer (buyer, paid subscriber, etc.) then you (and your data) are the product.

[TheDude]

Tesla does something similar, but for now I think it only applies to their auto insurance (Tesla offers it in some US States).

They could potentially keep rates low by driving bad drivers out of the pool of motorists they insure (or stratify them the way Geico does). Could end up being fairer to “good” drivers if info sharing and the resultant prescriptive remedies are handled fairly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by TheDude

Tesla does something similar, but for now I think it only applies to their auto insurance (Tesla offers it in some US States).

They could potentially keep rates low by driving bad drivers out of the pool of motorists they insure (or stratify them the way Geico does). Could end up being fairer to “good” drivers if info sharing and the resultant prescriptive remedies are handled fairly.

I'm sure that's the sales pitch but insurance companies already know who the bad drivers are.

This is just a way to jack up prices and claim...."well you slow down and speed up too much". (ever been on a LA freeway???)

[Blansky]

Originally Posted by zengineer

If you are connected to a website through the internet and are not a customer (buyer, paid subscriber, etc.) then you (and your data) are the product.

I think people already realize that their info is sold to marketers, who they can choose to buy from or not.

But not sure they know that they are sold to people who affect things like this insurance racket, are being tracked for medical reasons (abortion) and food buying habits can be tracked and used for life insurance and medical insurance costs.

This makes it far more invasive.

[kferg46]

This is old news and GM stopped sharing data back in March. They currently only make this data available to the driver. Next month they will be discontinuing this service as well.

I believe both changes were in direct response to people complaining.

[m j b]

Originally Posted by kferg46

I believe both changes were in direct response to people complaining.

That, and a few lawsuits.

I have a new (2023) GM product, and I fell into the group of people who had reported/sold data and only then was I able to opt-out. It was disheartening to see that I had several <cough> instances of high speed, hard braking and aggressive acceleration.

Their threshold is awfully low though. Think Grandma-driving-to-Church low.

It's annoying on several levels.

We (anyone who pays attention) know that all of our data is tracked and aggregated and reported and sold, but this data was specific and identifiable and potentially financially ruinous.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by m j b

That, and a few lawsuits.

I have a new (2023) GM product, and I fell into the group of people who had reported/sold data and only then was I able to opt-out. It was disheartening to see that I had several <cough> instances of high speed, hard braking and aggressive acceleration.

Their threshold is awfully low though. Think Grandma-driving-to-Church low.

It's annoying on several levels.

We (anyone who pays attention) know that all of our data is tracked and aggregated and reported and sold, but this data was specific and identifiable and potentially financially ruinous.

I think we all accept that everyone with a tech product that can communicate collects meta data and sells it as part of their business model. Collecting specific data and associating it with PII, then selling it without regard to consequences for the user rises to the level of immorality. I wonder what GM’s code of ethics says about this business practice.

[enjoythemusic]

Ethics? Immoral? Does not apply as you are the product / item of interest.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

Ethics? Immoral? Does not apply as you are the product / item of interest.

If I am the product they have some dire quality control on the assembly line.

[East Bay Rider]

Originally Posted by 330ci

For once, I'm in favor of the ambulance chasers.


Yet another reason why I prefer old shit boxes.

I'm with you on this. The more tech / connected new cars become, the more inclined I am to simply install a brand new, low tech drivetrain into an old classic and daily drive that. I'm not quite there yet but I'm close.
I do suspect that eventually the insurance companies will punish this way of thinking too as they eventually push for self driving cars or who knows what else they'll dream up in the name of "safety".